4.6 Article

Simplistic toxic to non-toxic hydrothermal route to synthesize Cu2ZnSnS4 nanoparticles for solar cell applications

期刊

SOLAR ENERGY
卷 122, 期 -, 页码 1146-1153

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.solener.2015.10.045

关键词

CZTS; Surfactant; Nanoparticles; Solar cells

资金

  1. Human Resources Development, Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP), Korea Government Ministry of Knowledge Economy [20124010203180]
  2. Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi, India [SR/FTP/PS-083/2012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Solution-synthesized nanostructured Cu2ZnSnS4 (CZTS) has attracted significant attention as a promising candidate for use as an efficient and inexpensive photovoltaic energy convertor material. In general, the solution synthesized route involves the use of toxic and explosive chemicals. The current report emphasizes a non-toxic surfactant mediated hydrothermal route for the synthesis of CZTS NPs (CZTS NPs) without the use of toxic chemicals. The physical and chemical properties of the CZTS NPs were studied using X-ray diffraction (XRD), Raman spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) techniques. The XRD and Raman spectroscopy results confirmed the formation of single-phase kesterite CZTS NPs. TEM analysis revealed the formation of well-dispersed CZTS NPs that were similar to 5-10 nm in size. The sodium dodecyl sulfate surfactant played a key role in the formation of the CZTS NPs. The optical absorption studies revealed that the CZTS NPs had an optical band gap of 1.85 eV, which is favorable for photovoltaic applications. The synthesized CZTS NPs could be used in the form of ink, which could be used to directly coat large area thin film solar cells. Moreover, the probable reaction mechanism for the formation of surfactant assisted CZTS NPs is proposed in present report. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据